alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>


                        

<ARTICLE>         5
       
<S>                                                                    <C>  
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                          3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                                DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                                     APR-03-1999
<CASH>                                                             3,082,000
<SECURITIES>                                                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                     37,356,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                                       1,367,000
<INVENTORY>                                                       86,084,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                 132,249,000
<PP&E>                                                            33,373,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                                     8,840,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                   184,040,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                             46,300,000
<BONDS>                                                           17,975,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                      0
<PREFERRED>                                                                0
<COMMON>                                                             171,000
<OTHER-SE>                                                       102,139,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                     184,040,000
<SALES>                                                           66,285,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                  66,285,000
<CGS>                                                             47,841,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                     47,841,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                           0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                      68,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                   655,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                    7,401,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                                       2,632,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                4,769,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                            0
<CHANGES>                                                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                                                       4,769,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                            .29
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                            .24
        

</TABLE>
**Part 1									Fiscal Year 2016 Reporting**

**SUPPLEMENT							Section II**

**PROPOSED CHANGES TO CURRENT USSGL ACCOUNTS FOR FISCAL 2016:**

**Account Title:**Receipts Unavailable for Obligation Upon Collection

**Account Number:**439400

**Normal Balance:**Credit

**Definition:**The amount of receipts that, immediately upon collection,  is  ~~are~~ not available for obligation. These receipts, or a portion thereof, may be available for investment before becoming available for obligation.  For example, the authorizing legislation may specify a  portion of the receipts is ~~are not~~ available for obligation, while the entire amount ~~remainder~~of the  receipts is ~~only~~available for investment. until a specified time in the future. These receipts, or a portion thereof, may be available for investment before becoming available for obligation. This USSGL account will offset the budgetary resource appropriation lines on the SF 133: Report on Budget Execution and Budgetary Resources/Budget Program and Financing Schedule, for a net-zero effect. This USSGL account also will crosswalk to column 11 of the Bureau of the Fiscal Service 2108: Yearend Closing Statement, to support the balances of the fund balance with the U.S. Department of the Treasury and/or investments. This account does not close at yearend.

***Justification: To remove FMS 2108 since it is no longer a statement, remove SF 133   references that are not needed, and to make definition more accurate.***

**PROPOSED TECHNICAL CHANGES TO  THE USSGL ACCOUNTS (Does Not Require A Vote)**

**Account Title**:           Central Accounting Control Account 

**Account Number:**     199900 

**Normal Balance:**      Debit 

**Definition:** This is a control account to reconcile activity related to the Statement of Transactions and Accountability (FMS 224, FMS 1219/1220, and FMS 1218/1221), Authority Transaction Module, and daily transcript reporting. This account is for the General Fund of the Treasury use only. This account does not close at yearend. 

***Justification: To remove FMS references.***

					        1		                              7/21/2016 IRC Handout

**Account Title:**Adjustments to Indefinite Appropriations

**Account Number:**439100

**Normal Balance:**Credit

**Definition:**The amount necessary to reconcile obligations with resources for indefinite appropriations derived from the General Fund of the Treasury. that is reportable on the Bureau of the Fiscal Service 2108: Yearend Closing Statement. Although the normal balance for this account is credit, it is acceptable in certain instances for this account to have a debit balance.

***Justification: To remove 2108, since it is no longer a statement.***

					         2		                              7/21/2016 IRC Handout
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM INTERIM
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS AT SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998             SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       3,270,764                 265,564
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                5,145,905               5,655,789
<ALLOWANCES>                                    97,920                 128,545
<INVENTORY>                                  6,844,215               7,392,079
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            15,790,326              13,276,844
<PP&E>                                       4,425,424               3,730,898
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,253,075               2,295,223
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              18,481,846              15,435,483
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        8,622,839              10,749,015
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                     4,846,505                     163
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,601,601               1,868,578
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                18,481,846              15,435,483
<SALES>                                     15,629,077              16,251,371
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            15,629,077              16,251,371
<CGS>                                        9,330,554              10,374,682
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,374,410               4,479,939
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                16,077                (12,570)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             198,111                 159,722
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,709,925                 979,598
<INCOME-TAX>                                   683,129                 303,675
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,026,796                 675,923
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                 174,202
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,026,796                 850,125
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.37                    0.31
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .26                    0.21
        

</TABLE>
Cite as 2015 Ark. App. 221

1 

## ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION I No . E- 14

- 718

RENEE ABBOTT APPELLANT
V. DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF WORKFORCE SERVICES, and JB HUNT TRANSPORT, INC.
APPELLEES Opinion Delivered April 8, 2015

APPEAL FROM THE ARKANSAS BOARD OF REVIEW [NO. 2014

- BR

- 01920 ]

REMANDED

BART F. VIRDEN , Judge Renee Abbott appeals the Arkansas Board of Review decision to deny her unemployment benefits. The issue is whether Ms. Abbott engaged in misconduct when she allegedly failed to text-message, or otherwise notify her employer, that she would not be in to work; however, we are not able to address the issue on the merits at this time because of a question of the record’s accuracy is presented for our review. The case is remanded with the instruction that the record be clarified and, if necessary, corrected. After a thorough review of the record, it appears that there is a discrepancy that cannot be overlooked. Specifically, the copy of policies and procedures provided by JB Hunt appear t o be for a company named “Vons

. ” The record offers no explanation for the inclusion of the policy manual for “Vons” and not JB Hunt.Cite as 2015 Ark. App. 221

2 Deficiencies in the record on appeal must be addressed if they hinder our review of the merits. In the event of a material omission or misstatement, we may sua sponte direct the record to be settled. Ark. R. App. P.

– Civ. 6(e) ; see also Heard v. Regions Bank , 369 Ark. 274, 276

– 77 , 253 S.W.3d 422, 424 (2007) (per curia m) . We therefore remand to the Board of Review with instructions to ascertain if a mistake has been made and, if so, to provide notice to the parties and correct the record accordingly. Remanded.
H ARRISON and H IXSON , JJ., agree. Renee Abbott , pro se appellant. Phyllis Edwards , Associate General Counsel, for appellee.
Exhibit 10.22


 


 





 






     1


     


    

 


 


 






     2


     


    

 


 


 






     3


     


    

 


 


 






     4


     


    

 


 


 






     5


     


    

 


 


 






    Page 1 of 1
```

                                                                    Exhibit 13.1

               CERTIFICATION UNDER SARBANES-OXLEY ACT SECTION 906

     Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a)
and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the
undersigned officer of Industrial Development Bank of Israel Limited ("the
Company"), herby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that:

     The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2006 (the
"Report") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and all information contained in
the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of the Company.

Dated: July 31, 2007

                                                     /s/ Uri Galili
                                                     --------------
                                                     General Manager
```
**Exhibit 23.1****Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on (i) Form S-3(No. 333-149090), (ii) Form S-3 (No. 333-145832),(iii) Form S-3 (No. 333-140481),(iv) Form S-3 (No. 333-136794), and(v) Form S-8 (No. 333-129203) of JavelinPharmaceuticals, Inc. of our reports dated March 14, 2008 relating to our audits of theconsolidated financial statements and internal control over financialreporting, which appear in thisAnnual Report on Form 10-K of Javelin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2007./s/ McGladrey & Pullen, LLP
# Sheet1

&"Arial,Bold"Part 2SUPPLEMENT	&"Arial,Bold"&16&KFF0000DRAFT	&"Arial,Bold"Fiscal Year 2025 ReportingSection VII

&"Arial,Bold"Bulletin No. 2024-01	&"Arial,Bold"&KFF0000DRAFT&K000000 VII CER - &P	&"Arial,Bold"IRC Handout 11/29/23
MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED CAPITAL TRUST III
                  MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED FUNDING III, L.P.
                    COMPUTATION OF RATIOS OF EARNINGS TO
        COMBINED FIXED CHARGES AND PREFERRED SECURITIES DISTRIBUTIONS

                                   For the Three Months Ended June 26, 1998
                             ---------------------------------------------------
                               Merrill Lynch Preferred   Merrill Lynch Preferred
                                  Capital Trust III         Funding III, L.P.
                               -----------------------   -----------------------

Earnings                              $13,530,930              $15,876,537
                                      ===========              ===========

Fixed charges                         $     --                 $     --

Preferred securities distribution
  requirements                         13,125,000               13,530,930
                                      -----------              -----------

Total combined fixed charges and
  preferred securities distributions  $13,125,000              $13,530,930
                                      ===========              ===========

Ratio of earnings to combined
  fixed charges and preferred
  securities distributions                   1.03                     1.17


                               For the Period January 16, 1998 to June 26, 1998
                             ---------------------------------------------------
                               Merrill Lynch Preferred   Merrill Lynch Preferred
                                  Capital Trust III         Funding III, L.P.
                               -----------------------   -----------------------

Earnings                              $24,664,961              $28,927,957
                                      ===========              ===========

Fixed charges                         $     --                 $     --

Preferred securities distribution
  requirements                         23,925,000               24,664,961
                                      -----------              -----------

Total combined fixed charges and
  preferred securities distributions  $23,925,000              $24,664,961
                                      ===========              ===========

Ratio of earnings to combined
  fixed charges and preferred
  securities distributions                   1.03                     1.17
----

|                                            |   |          |   |      |   |   |   |   |
|-------------------------------------------------|--------|---------------|--------|-----------|--------|--------|--------|--------|
|                                            |   | State      of |   |      |
| Name                                            |   | Incorporation |   | Ownership |
| InnoInnovative      Drug Delivery Systems, Inc. |   | Delaware      |   |      | 100    | %      |
|                                            |   |          |   |      |   |   |   |   |
| Javelin      Pharmaceuticals GmbH               |   | Germany       |   |      | 100    | %      |
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 00-10180

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

GUADALUPE CARBAJAL-GARCIA, 

Defendant-Appellant.

 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

(4:99-CR-196-Y)

 

November 3, 2000

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Guadalupe Carbajal-Garcia appeals the sentence imposed for his

guilty-plea conviction of possession for methamphetamine with

intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1).

Carbajal contends that the district court erred in enhancing his

sentence, pursuant to § 2D1.1(b)(1) of the Sentencing Guidelines,

for possession of a dangerous weapon. See U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(1).

“The adjustment should be applied if the weapon was present, unless

it is clearly improbable that the weapon was connected with the

offense.” Id., comment (n.3) (emphasis added). We review only for
2

clear error. See e.g., United States v. Vital, 68 F.3d 114, 119

(5th Cir. 1995).

Pursuant to § 2D1.1(b)(1), a defendant may be held accountable

for a codefendant’s reasonably foreseeable possession of a firearm

during the commission of a drug trafficking offense. E.g., United

States v. Aguilera-Zapata, 901 F.2d 1209, 1215 (5th Cir. 1990).

The Government may prove such possession by showing that “a

temporal and spatial relationship existed between the weapon, the

drug trafficking activity, and the [co]defendant”. United States

v. Mergerson, 4 F.3d 337, 350 (5th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 510

U.S. 1198 (1994). This nexus may be proved by evidence that the

weapon was found in the same location where the drugs or drug

paraphernalia were stored or where part of the transaction

occurred. Id.

The weapons were found in at least two bedrooms of the

apartment of one of Carbajal’s codefendants. Carbajal left that

apartment shortly before he delivered the methamphetamine, with the

weapons being found later that day. In short, there is a spatial

and temporal connection between the weapons and the offense. See

id. Therefore, the district court’s finding of possession was not

clearly erroneous.

Carbajal contends he never stayed at his codefendant’s

apartment or spent any time in the rooms where the weapons were

found. However, as noted, regardless of Carbajal’s knowledge of

the presence of the firearms, he may be held responsible if he

could have reasonably foreseen his codefendant’s possession of

them. See Aguilera-Zapata, 901 F.2d at 1215. Because firearms are
3

well-known “tools of the trade” of those engaged in illegal drug

trafficking, the district court did not clearly err in finding that

Carbajal could reasonably have foreseen his codefendant’s

possession of the weapons. See Mergerson, 4 F.3d at 350 (citing

Aguilera-Zapata, 901 F.2d at 1215-16). 

AFFIRMED
No. 61293.

protest 235721-K (Charleston).

#### Trans Atlantic Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

It is stipulated that the merchandise consists of butt hinges, imported with wood screws of steel, the hinges measuring 3 inches by 3 inches or 3J4 inches by 3)4 inches, being packed 2 hinges and 12 screws to a box (12 screws for each pair of hinges), and the hinges, size 4 inches by 4 inches, being packed 2 hinges and 16 screws to a box (16 screws for each pair of hinges), of the same kind in all material respects as the merchandise the subject of *Trans Atlantic Company*v. *United States*(35 Cust. Ct. 1, C. D. 1712). Upon the agreed statement of facts and following the cited authority, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained, the value of the screws being held as follows, as stipulated by counsel:

Value of screws U. S. dollars per 1,000 Hinge type

$1.21 3 x 3"

1.48 3)4 x 3)4"

1.64 4x4"

which values were included in the value of the screws and hinges, as invoiced and appraised.
#### Alice Pearl *vs.*Cumberland Sand & Gravel Co., Inc. James Pearl *vs.*Cumberland Sand & Gravel Co., Inc.

Cumberland.

Opinion, April 14, 1943.

*412*I. Edward Cohen,*for the plaintiff.

*Harry S. Judelshon,*for the defendant.

Sitting: Sturgis,C. J.,Thaxter,Hudson,Manser, Murchie, Chapman, JJ.

Sturgis, C. J.

In these actions of tort, which were tried together before a Referee with right to except as to questions of law reserved, the defendant filed exceptions to the acceptance of the Reports allowing the plaintiffs recoveries and awarding damages.

The plaintiffs were injured when the car in which they were riding, collided with one of the defendant’s trucks at the intersection of Elm and Lancaster Streets in Portland. The driver of the truck, employed by the defendant Company to haul sand with it from a pit in a nearby town to a construction job at the corner of Cedar and Lancaster Streets in Portland, it being noon when he dumped a load of sand which he had just hauled in, drove the truck to a restaurant several blocks away for his luncheon and at the time of the accident was on his way back to the job to get a slip for the sand he had delivered and return to the pit. It does not appear that there was any other eating place nearer the job or on his regular route, and although he had not received express permission to use the truck to drive to his noonday meals, this had not been prohibited.

The trier of fact could have found on the evidence that the negligence of the driver of the defendant’s truck was the proximate cause of the plaintiffs’ injuries and they were in the exercise of due care. He had a right to infer that the responsible officers of the defendant Company should have anticipated that its employee might have to use the truck to drive to his luncheon when he was in Portland at the noon hour and impliedly authorized him to do so. And whether at the time of the *413accident, although the purpose of his slight deviation fiad been accomplished, he had resumed his employment and was acting in the course of it was a question of fact and not of law. This case is governed by *Good*v. *Berrie,*123 Me., 266, 122 A., 630. It is not within the rule laid down in *Robertson, Admtrx.*v. *Armour Company,*129 Me., 501, 152 A., 407.

The controlling questions in this case were of fact and the decision of the referee thereon was supported by evidence of probative value. The exception to the ruling below cannot be sustained. *Wood*v. *Balzano,*137 Me., 87; *Jordan*v. *Hilbert,*131 Me., 56, 158 A., 853. The entry in each of these cases must be the same,

*Exceptions overruled.*